Science: Sorry, you ’ re not entitled to your opinion Liam Gavin
Fred Hoyle (1915 - 2001) was a theoretical physicist whose main triumph was to explain how elements heavier than helium could be created in the interior of stars. In the 1940’ s he developed a theory of creation that came to be known as the “ Steady State ” theory.
scientists and philosophers alike.
“ When does it become acceptable to stop saying that someone is entitled to their opinion, and state clearly that they are just plain wrong ”?
For example, if someone tells you they believe the Earth is flat, is the correct response: -
A) B)
Let ’ s agree to differ.
I accept that you genuinely believe that, but you are completely wrong. I disagree, but you ’ re entitled to your opinion
C)
Hoyle believed that throughout the universe matter was being created at a constant rate, while other scientists believed that all matter, and indeed time itself, started with a single event. Hoyle felt this was a crazy theory, and he laughingly called it “ The Big Bang Theory. ”
It does the other person no favours if you politely reply with either answer A or answer C. The simple fact is that the Earth is not flat, and there are literally hundreds of ways of proving this to be the case. If someone tells you that Manchester Utd is better than Liverpool, or that Leo is a better Taoiseach than Michael, that ’ s an entirely different matter, and there may be arguments on both sides of each claim. But the beauty of science is that it places the burden of proof onto anyone making any claim. If scientists examine competing theories (like Steady State and The Big Bang), and they prove one theory to be valid and the other to be false, then the winning theory becomes an “ accepted scientific fact ”. That doesn ’ t mean that it will remain a “ known fact ” forever. For centuries, scientists believed that the Sun orbited the Earth, but now we know that it ’ s the other way around. But what makes scientists trustworthy is the fact that they are always open to having their minds changed, but only if new information comes along that improves their understanding. A good and topical example would be the way the World Health Organization changed their initial advice about the benefits of wearing face masks, as the scientific evidence became overwhelming in favour of wearing masks. Scientists don ’ t take this as being a personal criticism. They welcome the fact that new information improves their understanding of the world. This is completely different to someone who “ flip - flops ” between supporting Manchester Utd one week, and Liverpool the next. And of course it is totally different to people who choose to bury their heads in the sand and stick rigidly to a belief that face masks are the invention of the devil, or a conspiracy by some “ deep state ”. The author drew on the following as a resource for this article https://history.aip.org/history/exhibits/cosmology/ideas/ bigbang.htm#hoyle
The initial observational evidence favoured Hoyle ’ s theory. According to the Big Bang Theory, the universe would be expanding. Steady - state theory also had an observational advantage over big - bang theory in 1948. The rate of expansion then observed, when calculated backward to an initial big bang, gave an age for the universe of only a few billion years— well below the known age of the solar system! That was certainly an embarrassment for the big bang theory. But as improvements in radio telescopes allowed astronomers to delve further into the history of the universe, and effectively to look further back in time, it became clear that all the evidence favoured the Big Bang Theory, and proponents of the Steady State alternative were reduced to making ever more bizarre explanations to support their view. Eventually, by the 1970’ s, the debate petered out and the Big Bang Theory became an accepted scientific fact.
All of which raises an important question, of interest to
29
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker